Woman drops lawsuit against Penn Hills police officers
A woman on Wednesday dropped a federal police brutality lawsuit against three Penn Hills officers, a lawyer for the officers and municipality said.
Noreda Young, 43, address unavailable, claimed that officers Dennis Wynn, Bernard Sestili and William Klobucher twisted her arm violently, breaking it in three places, when they arrested her in January 2010 at another person's home. The officers denied Young's version of events.
Young was living in Dormont when she filed the lawsuit in January. When Pittsburgh police arrested her on Oct. 4 for drunken driving, fleeing police and other charges, she provided an address whose zip code places it in the Lawrenceville/Stanton Heights area, according to state court records.
U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab on Wednesday dismissed Young's claims against the municipality and the three officers in their official capacity but said she could continue to pursue claims against the officers as individuals. Attorneys for both sides filed a motion dismissing those claims as well.
Ed Joyal, the lawyer for the municipality and the officers, confirmed that there was no settlement. Noah Geary, Young's lawyer, couldn't immediately be reached.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.